Skip to main content

Interesting discovery for those of us who like to interpret

Submitted by an LD OnLine user on

Found this worksheet on line. I’m sure it could be dangerous in the wrong hands. But what I find interesting is how it groups different subtests of different tests into certain categories. What do you think?

http://www.iapsych.com/cbsheets.htm

Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 12/14/2002 - 10:56 PM

Permalink

Cross Battery Assessment (Dawn Flanagan, et.al.) is a theory that is gaining in psycholgical circles. *If* the subtests are all reliable and valid, the method shown here (for averaging them) is okay.

Additionally, few outside of large clinics have all these tests. This is about $6,000 worth of materials. More when one considers being trained to give all these batteries.

Now let us consider the time to administer an assessment battery. How will one select which subtests to give? When does one stop giving tests and say we have enough?

This is not a worksheet designed to just “plug & play” numbers from prior assessment batteries. It is used after the subtests have been carefully selected *for* a cross battery assessment.

Good find, Karen!

Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 12/15/2002 - 12:04 AM

Permalink

I figured you knew if this was a valid way of looking at these subtests. I liked reading through it because it includes the CAS so it which sheds some more light on the subtests of that particular test. I assumed plugging in old numbers wouldn’t be meaningful, but I can see clear patterns in my son’s strengths so its interesting nonetheless.

Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 12/15/2002 - 1:18 AM

Permalink

I get many of my books from the library (World Cat database) and have them delivered to my library on Inter-Library Loan (ILL). Then, I read and make notes. I just cannot buy every book that I want.

“Cross Battery Assessment” (2001 I think, but could be 2000). Flanagan, Dawn and Ortiz, S. (I think is S). New York: Wiley & Sons.

For those with “interesting” children, studying cross-battery assessment will tell you more about them than the WISC will ever do. Mine certainly did (and does) fit that category, but none would consider any value for this idea back in the stone ages. There are still some pitfalls. (Like using less-reliable and less-valid subtests in your averages.)

There’s plenty to read on this theory of intellectual measurement: Cattell-Horn-Carroll is a primary one.

However, statistically this isn’t as valid as the WISC and so one must be very careful about doing things like measuring growth and comparing to WISC/WAIS or Stanford-Binet scores.

Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 12/15/2002 - 3:43 AM

Permalink

No doubt my son’s perseverence will be the single most important factor in his success. I just found that seeing how they grouped the subtests permitted me to see patterns that mostly confirmed what I know already. But there is always something else I can learn as we get more data on him over time. I’m just a data driven person by nature, can’t help myself from analyzing numbers.

Back to Top